They did so after the fact. They did not initiate it, which is my point. The students came up with the idea independently and executed it on their own. Khomeini and his mullahs took possession of it after the fact when they saw political advantage in doing so.

My point is that these Third World thug regimes are not well-oiled machines with disciplined citizenry taking precise orders from well-established chains of command. In fact, they are chaotic messes where everyone is doing their own thing, where each group is trying to dominate the other group, where nobody is thinking ahead but rather everyone is reacting to what’s in front of their face now. Their leaderships are often driven by bonehead blunders their folowers make.

The embassy takeover was certainly a bonehead blunder, as many of the hostage-takers themselves admit, which cost Iran dearly. A bunch of wannabe Berkeley-ite students thought they’d pull a harmless demonstration, taking over the embassy just like American radicals took over college administration buildings, and walk away after a couple days. Instead, they tossed a steaming hot potato into the mullah’s laps which they turned into an international incident that poisons relations with America to this day.

This piracy at sea may be derived from the same Third World lack of self-control.

The ex-hostage noted how they would often force a confession by holding another hostage with a gun to his head off-camera with the knowlege that if you did not follow the script exactly the hostage would be killed.

Yeah… lets hold a ‘dialogue’ with these animals…..

There is no doubt that the Iranian government backed the occupation of the US Embassy in Teheran. In fact, the matter was tried before the International Court of Justice, which reviewed the factual basis of not only the Embassy occupation, but of consular offices as well. You don’t have to believe me…just Google “International Court of Justice Teheran Hostages case”. It’s all there. As a result of the findings of the ICJ, Iran paid millions in reparation to the US and US businesses and citizens.

For me, however, the most telling fact was the ratification of the student’s acts by the Iranian regime, including the public awarding of honours to the leaders.

It always surprises me that conspiracy theorists with absolutely no facts on their side call anybody “gullible” who doesn’t buy into their speculative fantasies. You’re going to have to do better than spin fables to prove your case. If Khomeini gave the order, produce it.

The fact is that Iran under Khomeini in the days of the revolution was chaos. The revolutionary leaders were largely reactionary with respect to events, not daring to do anything that another faction could interpret as hostile. It took a while for the mullahs even to get interested in the embassy takeover. It took them by surprise and they didn’t know what to do about it.

It’s entirely possible that this Iranian act of piracy is similarly an irresponsible act of a small group of people. Third World nations are hardly models of discipline. More things happen there accidently than on purpose.

The words most operative to your argument are “conspiracy theory.” As usual with conspiracy theories, the documented facts of reality are given less weight than the speculative fantasies of the conspiracy theorists. If you think orders came from Khomeini, produce them.

In fact, the days immediately following the revolution were chaos. Iranian mullahs are none too competent even in calm times, much less so in the turbulent times of the revolution, when factions were fighting for power and all the mullahs were looking for an angle to gain power. The facts are pretty straightforward.

The world is too disorganized for everything to be a conspiracy. This Iranian piracy could easily be the work of one cowboy commander of the Revolutionary Guards, just like an international incident was created by one cowboy Chinese squadron commander who inadvertently crashed into a Navy spy plane off the coast of China in international waters not so long ago. Such incidents reflect the poor discipline of their military units.

Disregarding the actual words, the overall message it conveyed was brilliant: the British military consists of a bunch of WOMEN – in dresses and headscarves, standing in front of a flowery curtain! – abjectly confessing their crimes. The British are pussies and their military is toothless; this is a message that the other countries in the region will understand perfectly.

Lehuster, I know that the embassy takeover was done on the initiative of the students because they said so when interviewed by Mark Bowden for his book on the event, “Guests of the Ayaytollah.” The Iranian government officials involved backed up this version of the events. The Iranian mullahs didn’t know what to do about the embassy takeover at first. No orders came from the top because Khomeini rarely gave orders. He vacillated, leaning toward whatever set of advisors he talked to last. Before you start calling people crazy, you need to learn your subject, kid.

It never ceases to amaze me how gullible people are. Of course the “official” Iranian story, maintained from 1979 to this day, is that the students acted on their own initiative. Does that mean it’s true? Of course not. Khomeini ordered the embassy seizure in order to destroy his domestic opponents, specifically the group that sought improved relations with the United States.

Tim Burton on March 28, 2007 at 11:38 PM

In a perfect world… 20 years this would have happened.

How many sorties would have already flown under Thatcher and Reagan?

Are the armed forces of Argentina on high alert? I don’t know if they realize it yet, but the Falklands is theirs for the taking. Maybe Hugo can send some support, the West won’t do a damn thing about it….

Lehuster, I know that the embassy takeover was done on the initiative of the students because they said so when interviewed by Mark Bowden for his book on the event, “Guests of the Ayaytollah.”

Do you really think, Tantor, that they’d break their cover story for any western author?

The words “plausible deniability” are operative here.

This is going to get very interesting, soon. Lots of activity around Iran.

This act will be one of the most significant in history. I can’t wait to see how the crazies are going to blame Mr. Bush for it. What will the conspiracy be? He paid off the hostage-takers to save his legacy?

If our side made captives wear crosses, the Arab street would run red with blood. Priests would be killed, others would be threatened. It happened last year with the Pope’s reference to Islam. It would happen again now.
Where then is the Red Cro…

And why is this weak woman sailor accepting release ahead of her shipmates? Why doesn’t she refuse any special favors until all her shipmates are released. Why is the woman the weak link in this hostage situation?

Tantor on March 28, 2007 at 4:35 PM

I think it’s mainly the Iranians exploiting our protectiveness towards our women. We don’t send them on suicide bombing missions or use them as human shields.

I’ll shut the hell up then for I wouldn’t want to offend anyone who knows how to withstand torture…..but I will leave you with one last thought:

RULE#1: make it home.

Limerick on March 28, 2007 at 3:14 PM

Well, seems that James Stockdale disagreed with that. May he rest in the arms of Christ.

Here’s how you get them back.

Stop all Iranian shipping. They have one of the largest shipping lines in the world. Stop their ships and threaten to start sinking them, it might take a few, but they’ll start to know you are serious.

Second, hit the only gas refinery that Iran has and shut it down. Ask the US for use of a B-2, I doubt we will deny them that.

Mine harbors.

Hit off shore platforms.

Hit unloading docks in the harbors.

Finally, hit their power plants.

All these options have limited civilians deaths and large economic costs.

If they actually charge these guys, make sure you explain to the Iranians that they will pay more than the propaganda is worth, and explain to them that they will have their Iranian prisoners executed in public if they do the same to ours. I would tell the Iranians that I would be willing to use an airburst nuclear weapon to cause an EMP pulse that will destroy their electronics. (Hell, if I was Blair, I’d tell them through back channels that could include nuclear weapons, open wells, and the 12th imam….).

Historically, Iranian always has responded to force. In the 80s, they were mining the gulf and raising hell, but when we started taking out their platforms and ships they backed off and ran. If we don’t use force, they will have another propaganda victory for their people, like the Hez-Israel conflict last summer.

Iran also says it won’t release the female sailor, either.

amerpundit on March 28, 2007 at 8:52 PM

I heard that. They want the Brits to admit they were in Iranian waters?

I know that the embassy takeover was done on the initiative of the students

Tantor on March 28, 2007 at 10:07 PM

Heck, Berkeley even helped them with the overthrow.

Why is the woman the weak link in this hostage situation?

Tantor on March 28, 2007 at 4:35 PM

The Iranian government is simply using her to show their humanitarian side.

Lehuster, I know that the embassy takeover was done on the initiative of the students because they said so when interviewed by Mark Bowden for his book on the event, “Guests of the Ayaytollah.” The Iranian government officials involved backed up this version of the events. The Iranian mullahs didn’t know what to do about the embassy takeover at first. No orders came from the top because Khomeini rarely gave orders. He vacillated, leaning toward whatever set of advisors he talked to last. Before you start calling people crazy, you need to learn your subject, kid.

It’s a good precedent.

Let’s add the extra angle of a collapsing economy and an increasingly dissatisfied populus. What do you do to save your collective Islamist necks in that situation? You create (or resurrect) an external enemy by your own provocation. That’s exactly what they game plan was for Crazy Ayatollah #1 in ‘79.

It worked well then. Why not try it again?

if you think either this or the embassy take-over of 1979 resulted from excessive intiative on the part of over-enthusiastic lower-echelon commanders, you’re nuts. In both cases, the orders without a doubt came from the top

More importantly, even if the original action wasn’t approved by the top dogs, they didn’t order their subordinates to release the captives.

As the sign on HST’s desk said, “The buck stops here.” Those sailors are there because KookooMeanie and ArmageddonJihad want them there.